Great reporting. I had no idea of McMaster’s stance on the Israel Palestine issues. And I’m amazed that someone holding those opinions managed to sneak through to hold the position of National Security Advisor.

Clearly the Zionists have quite a task at hand in trying to remove him. As the article noted, Trump would look like a fool, correction, even more of a fool if he brought the axe down on yet another General in that post.

This wouldn’t matter to the Zionists. They care for no one but themselves let alone Trump. If there is one thing I have come to learn, never discount the shamelessness and tenacity of the Zionist nutters – nothing phases them and their zeal for supremacy over all of Palestine will not be thwarted by McMaster.

It’s up to all of us to support McMaster’s opinions and see to it he has a long and prosperous career as National Security Advisor.

I’m not surprised at all. A few years ago I heard an interview with Dr. Alan Sabrosky, formerly Director of Studies at the U.S. Army War College. He pointed out that the U.S. military, unlike Congress, does not pledge allegiance to Israel.

In its 2004 analysis of terrorism, the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board of the U.S. Defense Department concluded that “Muslims do not hate our freedom,…they hate our policies. The overwhelming majority object to what they see as one-sided support in favour of Israel and against Palestinian rights….”

Nor should we forget the shocking briefing given to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen by senior military officers in 2010. The team was dispatched by Commander General David Petraeus to brief the Pentagon on intelligence that Israeli intransigence in the peace process was jeopardizing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and that America was perceived as weak, ineffectual, and unable to stand up to Israel.

Ha’aretz, January 13, 2012:
“‘Israel is supposed to be working with us, not against us,’ ” Foreign Policy quoted an [American] intelligence officer as saying. ‘If they want to shed blood, it would help a lot if it was their blood and not ours. You know, they’re supposed to be a strategic asset. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people now, important people, who just don’t think that’s true.’”

EXCERPT:
“…despite statements from U.S. politicians trumpeting the friendship, U.S. national security officials consider Israel to be, at times, a frustrating ally and a genuine counterintelligence threat.

“In addition to what the former U.S. officials described to AP as intrusions in homes in the past decade, Israel has been implicated in U.S. criminal espionage cases and disciplinary proceedings against CIA officers and blamed in the presumed death of an important spy in Syria for the CIA during the administration of President George W. Bush.

“The CIA considers Israel its No. 1 counterintelligence threat in the agency’s Near East Division, the group that oversees spying across the Middle East, according to current and former officials.”

The team was dispatched by Commander General David Petraeus to brief the Pentagon on intelligence that Israeli intransigence in the peace process was jeopardizing American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and that America was perceived as weak, ineffectual, and unable to stand up to Israel.

there were some back channel skirmishes/communications (via swiss embassy) after one of the iranian scientists was assassinated — with the US denying being part of it (that is from memory — i remember writing about it at the time and sourcing it but for the most part it was covered up in the US media).

To be brief: Bottom line – Israel is an increasing major geopolitical liability for and a leading cause of international animosity directed at America. The current struggle between Zionists and American BDS proponents, the related sanctity of the Constitution’s First Amendment, together with plunging approval ratings for Israel among Americans, especially youth and the military, convince me that we are approaching its day of reckoning. It’s only a matter of time. Sooner or later, all nations act in their own best interests. In the not so long run, America will not be an exception.

Thanks for the excellent link to Dr. Sabrosky’s extensive analysis in written form. For those who would prefer to listen (e.g. while fixing dinner), a 23 minute video interview that covers the highlights of his analysis is here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCkeAIQJykk

Dr. Sabrosky is a Jewish-American. His Ph.D is from the University of Michigan, a highly respected research university. He is also a ten-year US Marine Corps veteran, a graduate of the US Army War College, and a former director of research studies there. Half-baked hasbara attacks on him dot the web.

“Reportedly the adults, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster….” (Paul Pillar)

Has it come to this? When hope for any indication of sanity lies in the hands of a former oil company CEO and two retired Generals, our future is precarious indeed. And notice how “realists” are labeled as “Israel haters.” And if someone “hates” the Jewish state, well I guess we know what that implies.

Just as it took anti-communist Richard Nixon to open ties with Red China, it just might take an oil exec and a couple of hardline generals to recognize the danger Israel poses to our nation’s interests and change course accordingly.

On his larger point I agree with Glenn. Much of the opposition to Trump comes from people who don’t trust him to invade or intervene as much as they want him to. They are afraid that the noninterventionist version of Trump will prevail or that he will too incompetent or inconsistent to blow things up the way they want them blown up.

Greenwald does seem to agree that McM is getting the islamophobia toned down. Whether this means anything good for the Palestinians I don’t know. Phil quotes some fuming Zionist rhetoric that suggests that McM sees things somewhat our way, but maybe we should treat this with some scepticism. Greenwald raises the question of a soft coup, and it does seem as if Trump has a kind of dependence on the support of these military men that he doesn’t experience with others – he couldn’t lightly get rid of them. Does this bear comparison with the Weimar kind of situation when a regime that has great difficulty in commanding confidence or even in being taken seriously is bolstered by generals in high office who quietly keep everyone informed of what the senior officer corps will and will not accept?

Reports are that , for better or worse, Trump is more and more retreating from his duties as commander in chief and deferring to the military. If that’s the case, I agree that it’s unlikely that the Zionists will be able to convince Trump to remove McMaster.

I must admit that the developments are vertiginous and I’m not sure what to make of them. Trump’s agenda was deeply islamophobic, and the goal was to provoke terror attacks to use as a pretext to install a police state, and purge the ‘incompetents’ and the leakers. This is why the ‘deep state’ revolted, and rightly so. (And I thank them!) So I think this bodes well for stability and mideast peace, but at the same time I wonder what’s up their sleeves. Because military guys are always strategerizing about something. Why did he go along with Trump on Syria, ceding it to Putin? This seems out of character for neocons. Anyway I like the giddy tone of this article. That Glick is quite a nasty piece of work and it’s preposterous to suggest that Trump ever supported Israel or wanted to go to the wall with Bibi.

I don’t expect anything special in the handling of Kushner. He follows orders and fights for the team or he’s out. I cannot see any middle ground on these requirements in a battle.

Regarding the battle I’ld see it globally as the multipolar forces against the unipolar hegemony. The multipolar forces are led by the governments of China, Russia and Iran, their opponents include the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia, and behind them there line up various forces of state actors, non state actors and political forces inside states, with the political line of conflict inside states often transcendenting traditional political organisations like parties. The most violent theaters of this global struggle can be seen in Syria and Iraq, Yemen, Ukraine, Afghanistan and soon – I fear – in Venezuela, too.

Inside the US, I see the surprising lines of the global struggle ran mainly between the military – commanded by the president – helped by Big Oil on the one side and money and media, or more specific, Wall Street and the Israel lobby including their stooges in Congress, on the other side. The US military seems to me – I follow especially Syria closely – since a couple of years quite helpful to the forces of the multipolar world. But also Afghanistan seems to be on a good way, since key to ending this war is getting Pakistan in line with the forces of the multipolar world.

The begin of this specific struggle inside the US I would date to Democrat Obama’s unusual decision to make the Republican Chuck ‘I’m not an Israeli senator’ Hagel his SecDef. Since then there is quite continuity in this struggle in the US, with the main hollow difference being that the US Presidency is now colored red instead of blue as it was before. But the struggle of Presidency and military against Wall Street, Israel lobby and their Congress continues similar to what was before, and the helpful role of the US military at the side of the multipolar forces in the hot wars continue, just as it was under Obama. And even key figures didn’t change. Obama’s pick Brett McGurk continues to lead US forces in the war in Syria and Iraq and Obama’s pick General John Nicholson does it in Afghanistan, while these wars continue to go in the direction the multipolar forces prefer it.

For what it’s worth, main-stream-media report that the Kushners will no longer have direct access to the president. They will have to go through chief-of-staff Kelly. If true, that would reduce their status and influence.

I read Ezra Cohen-Watnick’s political affilliations and official positions. Is it fair to speculate on the emotional ties to Israel and formative experiences of someone whose Jewish parents gave him the name “Ezra”? The MSM would certainly be doing that to any official with an unequivocal Arab name – in the fantastical case of, say, a Mohammed Abu Youssef-Nashashibi ever rising to such prominence.

RE: “Updated. Last night President Trump issued a statement affirming his support for National Security adviser H.R. McMaster in the face of a storm of criticism from rightwing outlets. The statement is a sign that Trump and his new chief of staff are taking the realist side of the debate inside his administration over foreign policy.” ~ Weiss

I hadn’t been aware of Gen. McMaster’s part-cleansing of the National Security stables of its more blatantly and disruptively Zionist tools-in-residence, so thanks to PW. On reading the e-mail “teaser” to the article penned pre- its update, “Supporters of Israel are upset by the personnel changes. The Israeli-American hothead Caroline Glick writes at her Facebook page that McMaster is “deeply hostile” to Israel as an occupying power.” my gut reaction was, “McMaster must be doing something right…”
When steam shrieks from the ears and lower mouths of intemperate, irrational yet vocal Ziopaths-in-the MSM-eye such as Glick, it’s a fail-safe signal that the object of their venom has either spoken the truth or done something right.
Btw, “…David Horowitz’s ‘Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week’” – the chutzpah’s breathtaking! Imagine the dissonant, ear-splitting cacophony if anyone organised a ‘Zio-Fascism Awareness Week’…

Sometimes we forget that people who do bad things can also do good things.
I’ve been rereading notes I made on Chalmers Johnson’s books. He recounts how, in the 1960s, people at the Pentagon formulated a plan for terrorist attacks in the United States, which they would then blame on the Cubans, providing an excuse to invade Cuba again. All the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on it. Robert McNamara quietly ignored it, and then forced the resignation of the head of the Joint Chiefs.

BTW, this may account, in part, for the readiness of a lot of people to believe conspiracy theories – because Americans actually do things like that.

… The agenda plus: Bannon has worked closely with the pro-Israel right, which says he has been particularly aggressive within the White House in advocating for scrapping the Obama administration deal they most revile, trading sanctions relief for Iran’s rollback of its nuclear program. Undoing the Iran deal featured on Bannon’s famous whiteboard, where he checked off Trump’s “to-do” list. (The deal has yet to be undone, but not for lack of trying by Bannon.) Whatever one thinks of the Iran deal, Bannon’s opposition to it comported closely with the current Israeli government, whose officials appreciated his advocacy. …

Support Mondoweiss’s independent journalism today

Mondoweiss brings you the news that no one else will. Your tax-deductible donation enables us to deliver information, analysis and voices stifled elsewhere. Please give now to maintain and grow this unique resource.